The former MPs,
who served as lawmakers between 2013 and 2018, have filed summons at the High
Court seeking an order to reverse the seizure of their land by Local Government
minister Daniel Garwe.
The
ex-lawmakers who include Fortune Chasi, Theresa Makone, Jessie Majome, Webster
Maondera and Temba Mliswa were allocated some residential stands in Goromonzi,
Mashonaland East province as part of their remuneration.
However, the
land has since been allocated to Rautenbach, who is said to be a Zanu PF
benefactor, under unclear circumstances without their knowledge by the Local
Government ministry.
“The plaintiffs
have no other satisfactory remedy, but to approach this honourable court for
the relief sought in casu,” the summons filed by their lawyers, Chasi Maguwedze
Legal Practitioners, read in part.
“The balance of
convenience favour that the relief sought be granted rather than wait for
transfer to be effected and expressed in title deeds, which will be very
difficult to reverse.”
They cited
Garwe, the surveyor general, speaker of Parliament Jacob Mudenda, Rautenbach
and the Registrar of Deeds as respondents, respectively.
“As part of
their remuneration, the plaintiffs were allocated residential stands by the
first Defendant situated in Goromonzi district, namely stands 1155; 1156;1 158;
1382; 1390;1179;1173;1415;1181;1407;1 453; 1193;1229;1231;1232
31250;1254;1397;1262;1 216;1275;1280;1293; 1294; 1297; 1307/1213; 1357;1332;133
4:1340; and 1341situated in the township of Stuhm in the district of Goromonzi
as more fully described in the annexure attached to the respective lease
agreements,” the summons read.
“Written
agreements were executed to that effect. Same are still extant and have not
been set aside. The plaintiffs have duly complied with all the material terms
of the agreements in question.”
The
ex-legislators said they were shocked to learn that their residential stands
have been allocated to Rautenbach.
“Without just,
valid or legal cause, the first defendant has procured that the same land
allocated to the plaintiffs as their remuneration be allocated to the fourth
defendant,” they submitted.
“If unabated,
the consequences of the first defendant have the effect of violating the
plaintiffs constitutional right to property and the effect of expropriation
without compensation contrary to the precepts of the constitution.”
They are
seeking an order declaring their offer letters valid.
“A declarator
that the lease agreements between the plaintiffs and the first defendant are
valid and extant,” the summons read.
“Consequential
relief to the effect that the defendants shall not alienate in any manner such
land as is leased to the plaintiffs without a court order or consent of the
plaintiffs.
“Costs of suit
against the party contesting suit.” Standard
0 comments:
Post a Comment